Telangana High Court
Prabhakar Mirkhelkar vs The State Of Telangana on 23 July, 2021
Author: P.Naveen Rao
Bench: P.Naveen Rao
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.16467 of 2021
Date:23.07.2021
Between:
Prabhakar Mirkhelkar S/o.Aswatha Rao Mirhelkar,
Aged about 82 yrs, R/o.Plot No.12.
Flat No.G-1, Ahilya Niwas,
Indrapuri Rly. Colony,
West Maredpally, Secunderabad & others.
.....Petitioners
And
The State of Telangana,
Rep., by Principal Secretary,
Revenue Department,
Secretariat, Hyderabad & others.
.....Respondents
The Court made the following:
-2-
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.16467 of 2021
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief :
"....to issue a suitable writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No. 2 to consider the family members certificate issued by the MRO, Marredpally, 04.02.2017 vide Lr.No.ER/1511/2016, and consequently register the Documents in respect of the properties bearing Plot No.150, in Sy.No.117, 120 of Yamnampeta Village Ghatkesar village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and Flat No G-1 in Plot No. 12, Ahilya Niwas, Indrapuri Rly Colony, West Maredpally, Secunderabad and pass such other order or orders..."
2. Heard Smt S.A.V.Ratnam, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue.
3. Petitioners claim that Smt Mani Bai @ Aparna Mirkhelkar worked in Indian Railways. With her hard earnings, she claimed to have purchased Plot No.150 in Sy.Nos.117 and 120 of Yamnampeta Village, Ghatkesar Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, by virtue of registered sale deed, dated 18.07.1989 and a flat situated at Plot No.12, Flat No.G-I, Ahilya Niwas, Indrapuri Rly. Colony, West Maredpally, Secunderabad was also purchased. She was also holding a savings bank account in State Bank of India, Branch at St. Johns Road, Secunderabad. Smt Mani Bai @ Aparna Mirkhelkar died on 29.07.2016.
4. According to petitioners, Smt Mani Bai @ Aparna Mirkhelkar was survived by the husband-1st petitioner and two daughters- petitioners 2 and 3. Petitioners claim that they are the legal heirs of late Smt Mani Bai @ Aparna Mirkhelkar and they are entitled to succeed to the properties standing in her name and petitioners contend that on the application made by them, to the Tahsildar, on -3- due enquiry, the Tahsildar, Marredpally Mandal, issued certificate authenticating that petitioners are the family members of late Smt Mani Bai @ Aparna Mirkhelkar. Based on the said certificate, the amount standing in the bank account of late Smt Mani Bai @ Aparna Mirkhelkar was allowed to be withdrawn by the petitioners. The 1st petitioner wanted to execute a relinquishment deed in favour of petitioners 2 and 3 and when petitioners sought to present the deed of relinquishment for registration, supported by the certificate issued by the Tahsildar on 04.02.2017, the registering authority refused to receive and register the document causing hardship and suffering to the petitioners.
5. Though, no material is placed on record to show that petitioners have presented the document for registration, but the document is not accepted and no material is placed on record to show that the Sub-Registrar has rejected the document. The fact remains that the certificate issued by the Tahsildar on 04.02.2017 was only with reference to the bank account in the State Bank of India, Branch at St.Johns Road, Secunderabad and it was clearly specified in the certificate that it was issued only to claim the balance amount which stood in the said account.
6. Petitioners have to assert that they are the legal heirs of the deceased Smt Mani Bai @ Aparna Mirkhelkar and get their names reflected in the concerned property records. Once the entitlement of petitioners is proved, then they can deal with their respective shares. Thus, even assuming that petitioners sought to present the document, it is premature for them to go before the registering authority to present the deed of relinquishment, even before their -4- right and entitlement to succeed is fructified in accordance with law.
7. Therefore, I do not see any error, assuming that the registering authority refused to receive the relinquishment deed, sought to be presented by the petitioners, warranting interference by this Court. Thus, leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their remedies as available in law, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 23rd July, 2021 Rds -5- HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.16467 of 2021 Date:23.07.2021 Rds